This says "individuals", not just CCW holders. Yes, criminals armed with guns kill each other all the time. That's not under debate.
Once again, Kellermann found an independent relationship between a gun being kept in the home and an increased risk of being murdered. This study (which was not limited to guns in the home) also found an independent relationship between gun possession and being shot. When confounding factors (such as prior arrest record) were adjusted for the relationship still existed. Why is this so? Having a gun may make people overconfident and thus willing to take risks that they normally wouldn't take if they were unarmed: "A few plausible mechanisms can be posited by which possession of a gun increases an individual's risk of gun assault. A gun may falsely empower its possessor to overreact, instigating and losing otherwise tractable conflicts with similarly armed persons. Along the same lines, individuals who are in possession of a gun may increase their risk of gun assault by entering dangerous environments that they would have normally avoided.58–60 Alternatively, an individual may bring a gun to an otherwise gun-free conflict only to have that gun wrested away and turned on them." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/
He also found that living alone and renting held a significantly higher risk of homicide in the home than having a gun in the home. Actually his data only supported an increased risk of a handgun in the home. Long guns were found to present less of a risk than no guns.
First, why should I trust you? I don't know you, and you certainly don't know me or my background. Second, yes there are some things more important than owning firearms, but not many. And right now in the luxury that is still the USA, its easy to fall for the false narrative of the "progressives", particularly with people who are not well educated.
Excellent answer. Many things in life are precious and owning a firearm is an excellent way of protecting them, the anti's will parrot back, no, no, guns will kill what's precious to you, no need for them, we now live in modern times centuries away from the Second and it's meaning back then. So you have no need a gun just dial 911 and help will be there within minutes. And the clock ticks on while the disarmed law abiding citizen and his family wait, barricaded in a bedroom hoping and praying law enforcement arrives before the attackers breach their safe room.
"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - John Adams. There is a reason why the Founders of this nation sought to create a Republic where the extremes of Democracy were blunted and diluted. The people of our Republic, sadly, through their own malfeasance and laziness, allowed themselves to accept the government's efforts to push us towards the organized mob rule of a more pure democracy, and this is what is creating the fissures and fractures now beginning to fundamentally dismantle our nation. The Founders recognized that there were things that needed to be protected from the extremes of democracy; things like the basic and fundamental human rights of the citizen. Basically, just because you have a supposed "majority" for your position doesn't mean you're right.
Face it: you keep saying that with zero justification. I've explained how such would not happen. I won't turn mine over. Ever. And there are millions more who wouldn't either... and a good number of them are the police and military you think would be seeking to enforce confiscatory orders. I know you refuse to believe that. I also know that the only way to prove you wrong would be for it to happen, and I pray every day it never comes to that. So....
Here you there, I pray it will never come to happen, it will be bloodbath and this country doesn't need such, but many on the left believe that is the only solution.
There is a self-righteous arrogance on the part of those with a certain viewpoint to be sure. I can only hope and pray they don't keep pushing their agendas against the "flyover country" people they hate, because the consequences will be horrific.
Because Arthur Kellermann was not actually engaged in legitimate research when conducting his so-called "study" and neither are those presenting this simple rehash of his discredited work. The sole reason this so-called "relationship" is found to exist, is because those employed to perform these studies are paid to present the argument that such is the case. May. Not does. More speculation without basis in the real world. The citation admits it is nothing more than baseless speculation without scientific verification. The use of words such as "plausible" and the repeated use of "may" indicates that those who put the article together are just guessing.
People still remember Waco, and no administration could survive that happening more than once. Citizens exercising their 2nd Amendment rights don't need to battle the government they only need to resist and sensible Americans will fall in line with the Constitution and reject gun grabbing scum...
Bloodbath my ass. I don’t believe any of this “tough talk” one bit. Those who talk like that are the ones who would piss themselves in fear.
I'm sure there are some who would... but personally I think that's the same argument as concentration camps guards gave when they said, "But I was just following orders!" The police and federal agents I know and am friends with are 100% committed to the idea that if ever given such an order they would not only refuse but arrest the person who gave the order on charges of treason.
Haha...good luck with that. If confiscation became law they’d have no grounds to arrest those who gave the order. Just more “tough talk”
Well, I can honestly say that many of the individuals I know who would refuse to comply with such orders and who are more and more concerned about open conflict are combat veterans, both military and law enforcement. They're not trying to engage in "tough talk"; they simply are talking about what actions they would take in the event certain events were to come to pass and hoping such might yet be avoided.
Not at all. Confiscation cannot become law without a Constitutional amendment, and the consensus among many of us is that anyone who gave an unconstitutional order to enforce an unconstitutional law would indeed face arrest; if for no other reason to send a message that such would not be tolerated. "All Enemies Foreign and Domestic" and all that.
And a SWAT team needed to enforce such, that is where funding and actuality meet, and from there the entire confiscation plan goes down the tubes for a lack of funding.
